"A small number of users are affected" I'm sure right Apple?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Says iPad Pro's XDR Display Designed to Minimize Blooming, but Some Users Still Notice the Effect
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What we are seeing is exactly the effect, if you are watching a - lets say - 4x4 pixel objet on a dark screen, with a background light which lights about the area of this 4x4 pixel object with "zones" much larger than the object itself.
Works great with movies or photos, it will fail even with some game like good old "Pong" - blooming guaranteed.
Works great with movies or photos, it will fail even with some game like good old "Pong" - blooming guaranteed.
Is anyone running 14.6 RC2 and have bad bloom? I‘m running 14.6 RC2 and have no noticeable blooming. Give it a try.
How would the iPad Pro look if it were restricted to 800 nits with no peak brightness like the Samsung AMOLED?
Some MacRumors Editors experienced blooming with the 12.9-inch iPad Pro's XDR display, but others found that blooming was not noticeable at all.
Oh God don’t say that. Now we’re gonna get hundreds of those threads of people returning their device over and over again until they get one they’re happy with.
Trust me, it's legit (see my previous posts). It looks ugly in certain films and makes actors look like Force ghosts but overall it's not too bad
You know, if the iPad had white bezels you wouldn't even notice this.
The lengths of excuses Apple fanboys will go to defend Apple’s bs is baffling.
So you admit your comment if sure if it is "BS from android fanboys and girls" is utter nonsense then. Got it. 👍
It certainly works as advertised, but does not work for a 1 pixel graphic on a pitch black screen, if you backlight it with a 10x10 pixel torch. Then you will get 99 pixels of blooming. (Theoretical values, just to illustrate the technique)
The preferred alternative would be OLED, but there is a problem. OLED doesn’t get as bright as the 1000nit LCD LED full array that even peaks 1600 nit mainly for outside usage. Normally you use OLED with various techniques to minimize chance of burnin like shifting pixels locations of the GUI, but if you really want high nit output outdoors I doubt it would work without the risk of burn-in of the GUI.
So Apple is using what they can until a alternative to OLED like microLED or something else is cheap enough to use.
I have ZERO problem with iPhone 12 screen... no headache no erectile dysfunction.
I updated from a 12.9 2018 iPad pro and the new one looks way better. I am sure if I put a video on that caused this exact issue I would see it but from a day to day, don’t see a problem. Anyways, this artical will allow all those “glad I did not buy.” People to feel better And proclaim it here.
Apple’s MO is always to make things as cheaply as possibly while selling them for as much as possible, any other benefits are secondary.
Why use more expensive OLED (that has its own downsides like burn in for example) when a cheaper mini led display is cheaper?
The primary reason for no longer including headphones or a charger for iPhone comes down to money (costs more to use Qualcomm 5G modems than Intel modems) the secondary “benefit” is it allows them to ship more phones per container and most folks already have a charger. Why they give you a USB-C cable when the previously free included charger was USB-A isn’t something I’ll understand.
The new Apple silicon based Mac primary intention is the M1 is cheaper than buying from Intel. Apple can spread the R&D for M1 across multiple devices, allowing for lower R&D, and the manufacturing of the silicon is cheaper because it’s not being marked up and sold to a 3rd party (Apple was the 3rd party customer for years paying whatever Intel wanted from 2006-now)
Of course the M1 also has some additional benefits including closer integration, faster performance since both silicon and software were designed for each other, but for Apple, the main choice for everything is money.
Bottom line first, customer, environment, etc second. That’s how it is with any publicly traded company, Apple isn’t special.
Last edited:
I've never been impressed by HDR. It seems like it needs to be WAY brighter to really be a game changer, like 10,000 nits.The preferred alternative would be OLED, but there is a problem. OLED doesn’t get as bright as the 1000nit LCD LED full array that even peaks 1600 nit mainly for outside usage. Normally you use OLED with various techniques to minimize chance of burnin like shifting pixels locations of the GUI, but if you really want high nit output outdoors I doubt it would work without the risk of burn-in of the GUI.
So Apple is using what they can until a alternative to OLED like microLED or something else is cheap enough to use.
Let me summarize:
- >1000$ for a Kid's Operating System
- Mediocre Screen Quality
- Battery life worse than cheaper MacBook Air
- Castrated Operating System that is mostly created for "consuming stuff"
= Facebook Terminal Device.
- >1000$ for a Kid's Operating System
- Mediocre Screen Quality
- Battery life worse than cheaper MacBook Air
- Castrated Operating System that is mostly created for "consuming stuff"
= Facebook Terminal Device.
facebook doesnt even have an good app for the ipad...so no, this isnt a device for that
But good enough for literally hundreds of millions of their phones for 4 years now?
Winner winner chicken dinner. Didn't want to pay the Samsung fee for the OLEDs. They have existed for years on Samsung tablets just fine. And less expensive devices than this iPad.
I mean all these excuses like "da burn in tho!" How freaking long does a static image sit on your phone or tablet with screen timeout? This isnt a deskptop or laptop.